Exemplary embodiments of the invention relate to training systems and, more particularly, to using superimposed visualization to allow for mimic training.
Prior art has concentrated on side-by-side training comparisons, and has not exploited advantages of superimposition of an instructor and a student's images. Before computers were available, side-by-side training methods consisted of use of large wall mirrors in dance and martial arts studios, so that students could see their mirror image and compare it to the instructor and/or the instructor's mirror image(s) by rapidly scanning back and forth for differences to correct. Chief problems with the mirror wall methods are the left-right reversal of the mirror which can confuse students, and the difficulty scanning between the two images looking for differences. With the advent of video, side-by-side comparison enabled “split-screen” that enabled the student to view their own image next to the instructors image (pre-recorded or live). The TV solutions also supported analog and eventually digital “flipping” of the imagery to eliminate the left-right reversal problems.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,184,295 issued Feb. 2, 1993, and entitled “System and Method for Teaching Physical Skills” by Ralph V. Mann, is believed by inventors of the current invention to teach using a plurality of images to generate an idealized human form model for teaching physical movements, and then a series of discrete comparison options of the student's image from the idealized model image. This approach suffers from multiple different types and levels of complexities in producing the idealized model, and especially in problems of comparisons of the student to the model that do not account for timing differences, nor shape and size differences between student and the idealized model. Problematic examples include calibration and reference point selections for the scaling process mentioned to even begin to work, a requirement of having an idealized model to scale, and requiring an idealized position to capture and compare the video to and other weaknesses most especially in the time domain. Further, the patent does not address shape differences of different body types that effect size measurements and comparisons. Further, the patent attempts to analyze relationships mathematically that are inferior to innate human perception in realistic contexts (person to person individualized training, etc.).
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2006/0094523 A1, published May 4, 2006, and entitled “Method and Apparatus for Teaching How to Execute a Predetermined Motion,” is very inconvenient, very difficult to use, and extremely limited by its requirements to use content specifically generated for use on full-length mirrors. For this invention to work, as understood by the inventors, all of the golf pro content has to be generated for the specific size of a full length mirror, with the content generated at a distance and at specific angles so that the student can mimic the same distance and angles as well as rotate their head to actually see the mirror with the golf pro image and their own reflection therein. Other shortcomings are associated with the student leaning forward or backwards differently or being of a different size than the golf pro image such that it throws off the perspective viewing and make the alignment coaching claimed into negative training. Other shortcoming of the invention include, but are not limited to: requiring a large mirror; requiring manual physical positioning; ignoring critical lighting configuration as well as brightness contrast difference between the reflected students image and the experts image; and no provision of live interactions between experts and students, etc. Further, the alternative embodiment with an extra screen behind the user suffers from requiring another screen, precise positioning an alignment of said screen in addition to the precise positioning and alignment of the associated mirror, with the added detractions of the users own image blocking the bulk of the detailed image of the expert image. Another key shortcoming is the reflected image is left right reversed which many users find distracting and hard to relate to.
All of the prior art lacks any teachings of the value of superimposed videos where at least one of which is semi-transparent of teacher and student so that students can either learn and practice by keeping their real-time opaque video image within the “ghost guide” of the teachers' videos shown as a semi-transparent layer on-top their own video imagery being displayed; by their real-time “ghost” image being superimposed over top of opaque teachers' video image, and various new types of uses based upon multiple layers of superimposed semi-transparent content.
The prior art teachings in the area of operational instrument display enhancement may be found in U.S. Pat. No. 4,845,645, assigned to the United States Air Force, and entitled “Sequential Rapid Communication Visual Displays” (RAPCOM). The inventors understand that this expired patent teaches sequentially presenting aircraft digital displayed information in the same area in a rapid temporal sequence that eliminates eye saccades, increases information throughput, and increases retention of the faster presented information. The Human eye/brain system is essentially “blind” and not recording visual information during eye-saccades, reducing both the frequency and intensity of the visual information processed by conventional side-by-side training methods. Prior art also specifies upon the scientific foundation of rapid sequential visual presentation (RSVP), identification and comprehension remains satisfactory. (RSVP reference Reading in the Brain by Stanislas Dehanene printed by Viking Press (pages 17 and 18) ISBN 978-0-670-02110-9 Copyright 2009). RSVP is a more recent scientific naming convention for the basis of RAPCOM to increase reading understanding speeds up to 3 or 4 times normal English reading speeds, thus providing advantages to increase to staggering reading speeds of 1,100 words per minute, and up to 1,600 words per minute for the best readers. This improvement results in reading approximately one word every 40 milliseconds, and 3 to 4 times faster than normal reading speeds.
However, users of such technology are still at a disadvantage as since the prior art is limited. Users of such technology would benefit from a system and method which allows for overlaying a user's image which can be placed in motion with that of an expert's image which can be placed in motion where dynamically reconfiguring (or resizing) the first image and/or the second image to a size in agreement with a non-adjusted first image and/or second image, to a size in agreement with the display device, and/or to a size acceptable by a user is provided.